Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

With this issue of Truth Magazine, twenty-three years of publication will be completed. In accordance with our mailing agreement which states that there will be no mailing the first week of July and last week of December, Truth Magazine will not be printed this week. The Lord willing, we will be back the first week of January with our thirty-two page special issue which is entitled “The Blood Bought Body of Christ.”

I think that you will not want to miss that issue of the paper. Here is a list of the articles and authors for this coming issue. I think that you can see from this list that this special issue of the paper is the kind of issue you would like for every member of the church where you worship and many of your non-Christian friends to have the opportunity to read.

What Is The Church? by Jerry Parks

Metaphors of the Church by Dennis Abernathy

The Organization of the Church by Darrel Haub

Departures From New Testament Organization: By Modern Denominations by Karl Diestelkamp

Departures From New Testament Organization: By Those Among Us by Jimmy Tuten

The Establishment of the Church by Earl E. Robertson

The Names of the Church by Bill Cavendar

The Names of the Saints by Johnny Stringer

The Work of the Church by Ron Halbrook

The Social Gospel by Mike Willis

The Worship of the Church by Keith Sharp

Apostasies in Worship by Leslie Diestelkamp

Terms of Membership by Irven Lee

The Church and Salvation by O.C. Birdwell

Can The Church of the First Century Be Restored? by Dan King

Is The Church of Christ A Denomination? by Leonard Tyler

Is Modern Denominationalism Acceptable to God? by Ron Halbrook

Unity In The Church by Irvin Himmel

The Blood Which Bought the Church by Bob Buchanan

I hope that you will enjoy this special series of articles. Having proof-read this material, I can assure you that the material in it is excellent.

As has been our custom in the past couple of years, Truth Magazine plans to publish at least two more special studies in the coming year. I have received enough comments regarding these special studies to know that our reading audience appreciates the extra work which goes into these issues. Frankly, I think that they have upgraded the content of Truth Magazine.

This issue of the paper contains our “Index.” To some of our readers, this is wasted space; to others, it is indispensable. Without an index, the material which is published in a periodical such as Truth Magazine becomes useless because it is not readily accessible. Though our index is not the best in the world, it is helpful to those who need to locate material published in 1979.

Building The Circulation

The circulation of Truth Magazine has remained rather constant throughout 1979. This has been caused partly as a result of changing printers; there were just too many other details to work out to bother him with the confusion of advertising mailing. Now that the problems of adjusting to Truth Magazine have been worked out, I anticipate doing more work toward increasing the circulation of the paper.

However, I will need your help. I need our readers to recommend Truth Magazine to their friends; I need them to send me names to whom I can mail sample copies of the paper; I need those who think that what we are publishing is worthwhile to send gift subscriptions to their friends or to purchase bundles for distribution. Will you help?

Walking With God Revision Available Soon

During this past year, we have rather quietly been working on a revision of the first twenty-four books in the Walking With God series of literature. This material covers the pre-school and first through third grade levels of workbooks. The material has been completely re-written; new artwork has been prepared. The lay-out of the material is designed to be used in conjunction with our Truth In Life series. However, we think that it has some features which will make it even better than the Truth In Life series.

In addition to having questions in the workbook for the parents to work with their children at home, this series of literature has some in-class worksheets over each lesson which the student will not have seen until he comes to class. We are not aware of any literature published among brethren which has this feature in it.

We are anticipating that Year 1, Books 1-4 will be available within a couple of weeks. We are publishing these books in this fashion because the teachers manual for the entire year will be published in one volume. The material for the series of literature is practically completed in its writing stage; we lack typesetting, artwork and printing. However, we anticipate no lengthy delays in getting this in print. Watch for announcements to the effect that it is now available.

Book Business Is Appreciated

We continue to appreciate the volume of book business which brethren are sending to Truth Magazine. Without your book business, Truth Magazine could not continue to be circulated on a weekly basis. I would like to remind you that Cogdill Foundation is a non-profit organization. This simply means that whatever profits are made through the sale of books must be reinvested in producing more material; it cannot accrue to the benefit of its board members. Consequently, everytime that we make an extra dollar, we use it to publish more good literature for Christians to use.

Presently, we have the following items being prepared for printing: (1) a biography of John T. Lewis written by Otis Castleberry; (2) a series of lectures on the grace-unity heresy which was originally delivered in the Dallas-Fort Worth area by such men as Tom Roberts, Wayne Partain, Bill Reeves, Robert Gabhart, Pat Farish, and others; (3) a 70 page manuscript by Tom O’Neal on the grace-unity heresy; (4) a commentary on First Corinthians by me; (5) a series of sermons by Irven Lee. Perhaps there are other works which I cannot immediately recall. However, you can see that we are concentrating on putting and keeping good literature in print. We appreciate your book business because it enables us to serve you in this manner; we think that your appreciate the kind of material which is being put in print.

More of the Same In 1980

As 1979 comes to an end and we face the beginning of a new decade, we who are associated with Truth Magazine are resolved to continue writing the same gospel message which we have been writing for these last few years. There is no conscious effort being made to change the thrust of the paper. We shall still be teaching, to the best of our ability, what is revealed in the Bible. We shall still be calling for book, chapter, and verse for those things which we see practiced in the world of religion. We shall still be exposing sin and commending righteousness. If you appreciate these things, I think that you will enjoy Truth Magazine in 1980.

Truth Magazine XXIII: 50, pp. 803-804
December 20, 1979

By John McCort

‘

Sectarian and denominational terminology should have no part in the language of Christians. In the last few years I have noticed a definite increase in denominational shibboleth among brethren. If we are going to effectively teach the world about the undenominational nature of the Lord’s church we are going to have to clean up our sectarian language.

Recently I heard a gospel preacher say, “We have even got that in the conservative church.” There is not such a thing as the “conservative church.” The Lord’s church is one body (Eph. 4:4-5). To fragment the Lord’s body into the “conservative church” and the “liberal church” and the “one cup church” is to make the Lord’s church fragmented into various denominations of which the conservative church” is one faction. (I am not trying to imply that the liberals are in the Lord’s church.) All I am saying is that the Bible teaches there is only one body. We are either in the body or out. Let us not confuse people in our preaching and writing by using denominational phrases.

I also heard the statement made, “Mon of our leaden in the conservative brotherhood are sick or are fading out of the picture. Some new leaders are going to have to fill the void.” Where in the New Testament do we read of having leaders in the conservative brotherhood? The New Testament church had inspired apostles but the only authority they had way in relation to what the Holy Spirit inspired them to say. The New Testament authorizes elders, deacons, evangelists, and teachers (Eph. 4:11-12) but it nowhere authorizes “leaders of the conservative brotherhood.” In reality no such office exists. It exists only in the sectarian minds of some politically minded brethren.

One brother said, “We only have big preachers for our meetings.” Several years ago we had an evangelist hold a meeting that was in great demand to hold meetings. When the subject of pay was brought up one of the elders said, “We have got to pay Brother ____ more than we normally do because he is a big preacher.” 1 know that most evangelists do not expect more pay just because they are more in demand for meetings than other evangelists, but this kind of mentality is just another example of sectarian thinking. 1 recognize that because of ability and experience some men are going to be more influential than others. This is only natural. But the idea that we have got to pay a man more for a meeting because he is a “big” preacher is creating distinctions that the Lord did not create. I feel we should judge a man on the basis of faithfulness and dedication to the Lord’s cause. We need to get away from this “big preacher” and “big church” syndrome. This caste system has a negative effect on the Lord’s work because it tends toward sectarianism.

There are some terms that are less than expedient. For example, “Brotherhood papers, brotherhood colleges, preacher training schools, church of Christ preachers, church of Christ colleges.” The scope of some church sponsored, “Schools of Preaching” go far beyond the scope of the local church that oversees the work. I know of one church that cancelled its “preacher school” because they could not get anybody but their own members interested in it. Because of a lack of national interest in the; program it was cancelled. The original intent of the special training courses was to edify the “church universal.” (I use that phrase rather loosely.) It is not tile responsibility of a local church to edify the brotherhood but rather to edify its own members.

We all need to confine our emphasis to the local church of which we are members. File local church is the functional unit that God organized, not the brotherhood.

Truth Magazine XXIII: 50, p. 802
December 20, 1979

By Trustees of the Akin Foundation

In May, 1948, Mr. John W. Akin, a Christian of some financial substance, placed a certain amount of his assets into a non-profit corporation in order that he might make continual contributions to the work of the Lord in the wisest manner possible. The foundation was established under the laws of Texas. The charter provides that three trustees were to be appointed to dispose of funds from the foundation to churches of Christ in the United States of America. Listed below are some of the specific points made in the original charter for the foundation:

1. The charter was to exist for thirty years.

2. The foundation was authorized to distribute funds, either principal or income or both, to any church of Christ in the United States of America.

3. The income or revenue was to be distributed annually as received. Any part of the undistributed income should then be donated and delivered to the Preston Road church of Christ in Dallas, Texas, at the end of the fiscal year. Additionally, all property on hand or held in trust at the time of the foundation’s dissolution was to be delivered to the Preston Road church of Christ.

4. The foundation was expressly forbidden to ever attempt to exercise any attribute of power or authority over any church. It was charged to recognize the sovereignty of churches. Contributions were to be made without any conditions subsequent or covenant.

5. Originally, no funds of the foundation were to be donated for the benefit of any trustee of the foundation, save and except for reasonable and necessary operating expenses, including expenses to attend board meetings. In 1955, while brother Akin was still living, the original charter was amended to permit the foundation to contribute to churches whose preachers were also Akin Foundation trustees, and Preston Road church of Christ was removed as the beneficiary of the corpus in the event of the dissolution of the foundation; however, undisbursed income, if any, was to continue to go to Preston Road church.

The Akin Foundation continued to operate without interruption until 1975. During that year charges were brought against the trustees, James W. Adams, Foy Vinson, and Bryan Vinson, Jr., in the 68th District Court, Dallas County, Texas, by the Attorney General of Texas. It is alleged that this action was precipitated because a “friend” of Bryan Vinson, Jr. reported irregularities to the Attorney General. Contrary to rumor, neither Preston Road nor any of its members had any knowledge of this action nor was responsible for it. The 68th District Court prohibited the three trustees from performing their duties until the charges were resolved. It placed the foundation in the hands of a receiver. This same court was responsible for the ultimate resolution of the foundation’s problems, including restoring the foundation to court appointed trustees. We are now able to report happily that the foundation is again operating under its original charter as brother Akin intended and with the full approval of the court.

The guilt or innocence of the former trustees is not the purpose of this article: Civil charges were brought against James W. Adams and Foy Vinson. Early in the proceedings, James Adams was able to satisfy the court and the Attorney General of Texas that he was not guilty of intentional wrong doing, so the charges against him were settled and he resigned as a trustee of the foundation. Subsequently, Foy Vinson had the charges against him settled under similar terms as Adams. Bryan Vinson, Jr. had civil and criminal charges made against him. He was judged “not guilty” in a criminal court by a jury of twelve. citizens. He has settled the civil charges against him and has resigned from the foundation as a trustee.

This report is being made in a widespread manner because of the uncertainty about the concern for the foundation in the minds of so many brethren. Brother Akin, a Christian gentleman and successful businessman, had a problem that only a few Christians have: he was given the stewardship of a rather large sum of money. Desiring to do good with it, he established his foundation. Because his money has done so much good for so long and in so many different areas, we desire that all brethren should have available to them accurate information concerning the resolution of the foundation’s problems and its present status.

During the early part of the litigation in 1975, the court became aware that the difficulties concerning the Akin Foundation were more than legal. Constituent parties differed seriously over doctrine. The doctrinal problems centered around institutionalism. This included “sponsoring church” type of cooperation and church support of human institutions.

In the early 1950’s, brother Akin worshiped with the Preston Road church in Dallas, taking an active and interested part in its functions. Eventually, he expressed his disagreement with the doctrinal position the Preston Road church was following and moved with other Christians to establish another local church of Christ whose practices were different from those of Preston Road.

The trustees selected personally by brother Akin either opposed one church overseeing the funds of many churches as exemplified in the “sponsoring church” or else they were replaced by men who did oppose this facet of institutionalism. Preston Road did not receive any contribution from the foundation prior to or subsequent to brother Akin’s removal of his membership.

While Preston Road church was a contingency beneficiary of Akin Foundation funds, close friends have reported that brother Akin intended to remove them from contingency consideration under both the foundation and his will. He reportedly had instructed his attorney to work with the three trustees in the changing of the charter of the foundation, and also to change his personal will to conform to the changes that were made in the charter of the foundation. It is a matter of fact, however, that neither of these intentions were ever completely carried out by his attorney. Brother Akin died before these actions were consummated. Therefore, both the original charter as amended, and the will, as originally written, were binding. Preston Road church makes the point that brother Akin lived for more than two years following his leaving their membership. Therefore, he had opportunity to change his will but did not do so. In fact, one change was made during that period in the will, but the original contingency remained intact.

Accordingly, therefore, under the charter and the will, the Preston Road church had the legal right to receive funds from the Akin Foundation, and was named as a contingent beneficiary by the will.

It is not the present trustees’ desire or intention to pass judgment on merits of the claims of the Preston Road church of Christ. In working out a solution with them, we did as the court did: that is, we accepted the legal documents at face value. We assumed that these documents represented brother Akin’s intentions as to the disposal of his assets at the time of his death.

Prior to the present trustees’ attempt to resolve this problem, another concerted effort was made by individuals, under the leadership of brother Roy Cogdill, to legally restore the foundation to the trustees and thus end the receivership. These men proposed installing specific procedures in order to insure public confidence, as well as the confidence of the court, in their directorship. The court resented this group’s efforts. Their plan was withdrawn after they were held in contempt, and upon threat of jail and fine by the court.

Subsequently, it became apparent that the court intended to decide the ultimate solution of the foundation’s problems in favor of the Preston Road church. In fact, the court ordered the receiver to pay a large sum of money to the Preston Road church under the charter’s provision that this church should receive any and all parts of undistributed income at the conclusion of the fiscal year. Furthermore, it became reasonable to assume, in light of the above fact, that Preston Road would receive a vast majority of the foundation’s assets and that they would also be influential in the court’s appointment of future trustees of the foundation. By this time the court had extended the life time of the foundation.

At this point, several interested individuals met in Dallas, Texas with the attorney who had represented the Cogdill group and who was fully informed in all aspects of the case. They met to discuss the cost of funding an appeal, assuming the court rendered an unfavorable ruling to the foundation’s trustees. At this meeting, James D. Yates of Houston, Texas, requested the time to contact the Preston Road church in an attempt to work out an acceptable compromise which could be recommended to the court as a final solution. The group agreed to this. Yates brought in Harry Pickup, Jr. to assist him in the attempt. Pickup made his personal investigation and determined that he could support the effort. He and Yates arranged a meeting with the Preston Road elders and found them to be favorable to a compromise which would remove the foundation and churches of Christ from unfavorable publicity in both the papers and the courts. Yates and Pickup found the Preston Road elders to be men of principle, honor and integrity in their dealings. Even though we recognize the doctrinal differences between us, we have found them to be exemplary and cooperative in their actions as regarding the resolution of the Akin Foundation’s Problems.

Their attorney, Mike Boone, who is also a deacon in the Preston Road church, has been especially helpful and fair to us. We acknowledge our grateful appreciation to him.

The compromise agreement is as follows:

1. The Preston Road church would receive 60 percent of all assets; the Akin Foundation would retain 40 percent. This division does not include the one time large sum awarded to this church by the court.

2. The Preston Road church would recommend to the court that Yates and Pickup be appointed as trustees of the foundation, thereby returning the foundation tojhose men who hold the conservative point of view regarding institutionalism.

3. The Preston Road church would remove itself for all time as a contingency beneficiary under the charter and the will.

The court agreed with this procedure and appointed Yates and Pickup as trustees, instructing them to work out a viable solution with Bryan Vinson, Jr., and at the same time to recommend to the court a third trustee. Yates and Pickup recommended Fred A. Hutson, Christian and banker of Alto, Texas. He was appointed by the court as the third trustee upon the resignation of Bryan Vinson, Jr.

Brother Cogdill and other brethren of his group are to be commended for the personal sacrifices that they made in an unsuccessful attempt to save the whole of the foundation. They contributed considerable amounts of time, energy and money.

Brethren, these problems are now resolved according to the wisdom of the court. Sixty percent of brother Akin’s endowment has been transferred to Preston Road church of Christ. The remaining 40 percent will be under the present trusteeship of James D. Yates, Fred A. Hutson and Harry Pickup, Jr. The income from the assets will be used exactly as brother Akin directed. Churches will recieve contributions in due course as directed by the charter. The current trustees will continue to correct any inadequacies of procedures and will instigate procedures which will assure confidence in this trusteeship. We will work faithfully to follow brother Akin’s instructions explicitly to the best of our abilities, God being our helper.

Trustees of the Akin Foundation

11-1-79

Truth Magazine XXIII: 49, pp. 794-795
December 13, 1979

By Ronald D. Hooves

A Questionable Power

Our intrepid author decided to end his scholarly section of the book with an emotional appeal.

It is also true that if once put away he can never remarry, the wife has the power to restore his home with her or put him away and thus deny him the right to ever be married again. Would you care to have such power? If you had it would you dare exercise it? Remember, even if you should die, his sentence of celibacy continues until his death!(1)

Apparently Hale is trying to frighten us off firm ground with scare tactics. Brethren, I do not shed tears when the murderer is executed, the rapist locked up, and the thief put behind bars. Law, civil or spiritual, is a product of the divine right to rule and to enforce penalties. Without laws and without penalties for those laws, we would be an anarchical society.

We never rejoice at the unfortunate circumstances of others, but neither can we afford to shed crocodile tears when justice is meted out. That God gives the innocent party of Matthew 19 this prerogative is sensible, just and a fitting deterrent for a most heinous crime. Let us hold up the hands of those who must make these decisions and not brow beat them into distraction with our misplaced emotions.

Grammar, Grammar, Grammar

Pages 32 through 44 of our subject text deal with ten common objections to Brother Hales thesis. I have chosen to deal with objection number 4 which I find the most objectionable of all. In four pages Brother Hale seeks to prove his point by using the grammatical argument. Several years ago when I held Brother Hales position, this is what had convinced me. Someone said “Why the grammar proves it,” and whipped out a sentence diagram showing the “except for fornication” phrase modifying the second clause in the compound sentence of Matthew 19:9. In other words, “Whosoever marries a woman who has been put away commits adultery, unless she was put away for fornication, and then its okay.” This is where Brother Hale should have pitched his tent to begin with. If that is what the scripture says then that is what the true believer will hold fast to. It matters not if the implications of the position demand that the whole civilization comes tumbling down around our ears. “What does the scripture say?”

Some General Objections

Brother Hale makes an argument that smacks of intellectualism. How many times have I heard a Christian Church preacher say, “Well, if you non-instrumentalists knew the Greek, you would admit that we’re right.” I distrust anyone who cannot find their position in the English Bible. One of my all time favorite quotes is from Brother Edgar Srygley who says he is often asked if you have to know Greek to go to heaven!

My second general objection is that Brother Hale again finds himself in the same old quandry of having to quote himself as an authority. He comments,

Firm Foundation (Fib. 20, 1973, p. 921) carried a diagram of Matthew 5:32, diagrammed by a Greek teacher in one of our Christian colleges. It did not carry the Greek words, so they have been supplied . . . . while I do not believe the diagram is strictly correct (emp. mine – rdh) I would like to use it, but, with one addition. Please note apart from a matter of fornication on the dotted lines. This indicates it as being understood.(2)

He does not believe it is strictly correct, but offers us no scholastic credentials to challenge those of the Greek teacher. Not only that, but our intrepid brother puts himself up against 500 years of English Bible translations when he says “excuse me while I insert this little phrase down here” (paraphrase mine – rdh). At this point, I am inclined to say, “I don’t care that you don’t believe it is correct Brother Hale. That is not the issue. What can you prove?”

In another of his amazing attempts to enlist support for his views, he resorts to Dean Alford again. Again, he winds up having to admit

the witness is unfriendly to the position herein advocated.(3)

Even a casual observer would cross his eyes at this juncture and ask, “Why use a man as an authority when he doesn’t agree with you?” Alford knew the grammar backwards and forwards which is evident from Hale’s respect for him, and yet Alford did not believe the scripture taught what Hale says it does.

But now, what about grammatical argument, or logical implication, or that inserted, understood phrase? Does it really belong. there in the second clause? Several universities have been polled on this question and here is a sampling of their replies to our question, “Gramatically speaking, does the phrase except for fornication modify the clause in the compound sentence in Mt. 19:9?

Texas Tech: “From a strictly grammatical standpoint the phrase except for fornication modifies whosoever shall put away his wife.”

University of Georgia: “The phrase except for fornication should not be read into the second clause.”

University of Wisconsin: “No, it is not possible for the except to modify both clauses.”

This is just a drop in the bucket sampling of the overwhelming grammatical evidence against Brother Hale’s position. Our young adult class here at St. Paul, polled 35 state universities on this question. The results are overwhelming. Simply put, the verse does not say what Brother Hale wants it to say. It does not say it. It does not mean it. It does not imply it. It does not teach it.

Finally

I hope for this article a wide circulation among those of my brethren whose lives have been touched by this false doctrine. It must be met and defeated, we must speak out, as truth cannot defend itself. My personal thanks to Cecil Willis and Glenn Burt who paddled my britches on this topic four years ago.

Recommended Reading

1. Except For Fornication, Roy Deaver, a review in Spiritual Sword, Vol. 6, number 2, pp. 14-26, Jan. 1975.
2. Divorce and Remarriage, J. D. Thomas, B.R. Press (Abilene, 1977).
3. Divorce and Remarriage, Gene Frost, series in Gospel An chor’ (Louisville, Jan.-Feb. 1979).

Endnotes:

1. Op. Cit., Lewis G. Hale, p. 30.

2. Ibid, p. 36.

3. Ibid, p. 39 (see also Greek Testament, Vol. 1, Henry Alford,) (Chicago, 1958), p. 194.

Truth Magazine XXIII: 49, pp. 792-793
December 13, 1979